- Joined
- Oct 22, 2010
- Messages
- 62,851
You're right, chief - I should've considered that.verminater said:It's the Mail Steve!
Meanwhile, the Mail has a piece on the expensive watches "England's flops" wear. I wish I was kidding...
You're right, chief - I should've considered that.verminater said:It's the Mail Steve!
Nobody can even come close to England on that front.Belgium have got to be the most overrated international team ever .
Feck! Poor prediction. The game didn't play out that way at allWales to attack early to try to get ahead and then punish the Belgians on the counter after that.
2-1 Wales.
Awsome stuff mateAbsolute top draw today....goosebumps at the final whistle. I'm ecstatic for the Welsh...what spirit and determination they all showed. Our English lads could learn a thing or two from them...or 8 ! Turns out Gareth Bale was right about their passion after all when he was comparing the two nations.
Gwaaaaan !
Iceland?The greatest night in Welsh football history. I didnt post on here last night as was too emotional. My dear old mum was watching on from above.
Our desire, determination and work ethic was outstanding. We have a system, and a game plan and the team works damn hard to carry that out.
Whatever happens next we have been the story of the tournament.
Yea, I'd say both Iceland and Wales have stood out, maybe I'm biased because Welsh and it's already Iceland being the stand out, if they get passed France, which I think they could, I'd certainly agree with you Iceland were story of the tournament.Iceland?
Wales are a good side and this really isn't suprising imo.
I couldn't have put your post better, there's clearly a great work ethic there and they run their legs off, every single man but yes, there's more to it than that I think it's more of a disservice to them to always say how bad their opponent has been.Think it's a bit of a disservice to Wales to bang on about work ethic, they're much more than that. They seemed to accept that Belgium would start fast and sat quiet deep but then Wales went on to control possession at important stages and basically the game mapped out as Wales wanted it to.
From that very first game when Davies made the clearance from under the bar from Hamsik they have defended heroically and that sequence of clearances last night was defending at its finest.
I think they will get past Portugal but then come a cropper in the final but what a story it's been !
Ha, well played.I didnt say work ethis was the only contributing factor. They have a system, and every player knows their role and how to carry that out. Also there have been some outstanding performers also in WIlliams, Alan, Ramsey and Bale.
Yes I agree Iceland have also been a major story in the championships, however Iceland did have an easier match in the last 16
I was pleased for Wales too that Bale didn't score and I think secretly Coleman will have to been too now that the games won. Of course he's the talisman and a world class talent but sometimes his immense contribution can overshadow what the rest of the team do and had we seen his name on the scoresheet last night there's a tendency to think he's bailed (excuse the pun) them out again.I couldn't have put your post better, there's clearly a great work ethic there and they run their legs off, every single man but yes, there's more to it than that I think it's more of a disservice to them to always say how bad their opponent has been.
That goal line clearance from Davies in the first match defined the tournament for us, could have been so very different if that had gone in and we had to chase a goal.
The clearances last night in that funny five minutes were just unbelievable, I'm genuinely still in shock at what happened. I celebrated every Welsh corner, every Welsh free kick, every bloody throwing, confused the shit out of my 6 yr old as to why I liked throw ins so much, he's never had the chance to see me like that with United the past few years.
Or I can't! Still filling up with tears watching it on the news. Very strange emotions, mixtures of pride, relief, shock, happiness.Still can't believe we're in the semis.
They did go further since they were amongst the top 8 in 2012, while they were only amongst the top 16 this time.yeah they played better fro sure - but my point was they didn't actually go further. A sad indictment in itself.
I've got to defend Wilmots here, of course he was out of his depth, but he got the job because they couldn't find anyone else. After years of mismanagement, empty stadiums and beeing the no 77 in the world the Belgian FA was a mess and did not have the money or organization to properly care for a national team. Van Gaal had talks with them and found out that's not how he wanted to work, Advocaat took the job, found about the circumstances he had to work in and quit. So Wilmots had to get them through qualifying and he did, they kept winning so he could stay. After the disappointing WC the quite poor but exciting match against the US the whole country including the king and the government was in denial and acted like they did well because the national football team was keeping the country together, the Flemish, the Wallons and the immigrants.Fair play to Wales, got their tactics right and know their strength. Now sack Wilmots and bring somebody in who will actually get this team going and knows that the feck he's doing. What. A Pathetic. Performance....I saw some shambolic defending at display today.
They got out of the group stage on both occasions - more teams got out in 2016 and I would agree with you had they finished in third place and only got out because of that new rule.They did go further since they were amongst the top 8 in 2012, while they were only amongst the top 16 this time.
Well had only the top 2 gone through from every group, Slovakia wouldn't just have parked the bus in the last group game against England, since they would've needed to win, and then England might've gone out. It was easier to go through from the group this time, and England still only finished 2nd in an easier group than the one they won in 2012. It's minor details, but in 2012 England had a decent tournament, and certainly better than both 2014 and 2016.They got out of the group stage on both occasions - more teams got out in 2016 and I would agree with you had they finished in third place and only got out because of that new rule.
They played the same number of games at both tournaments and failed at the first knockout round. We're splitting hairs really - they were rubbish in all tournaments under Roy.
Had Slovakia not parked the bus England may also have won the group.Well had only the top 2 gone through from every group, Slovakia wouldn't just have parked the bus in the last group game against England, since they would've needed to win, and then England might've gone out. It was easier to go through from the group this time, and England still only finished 2nd in an easier group than the one they won in 2012. It's minor details, but in 2012 England had a decent tournament, and certainly better than both 2014 and 2016.
But that´s what it´s all about. You should have a little Schadenfreude. Basically football and sports is there for countries to measure dick-size without throwing bombs. Imagine how peaceful the world would be, if the Middle East, Pakistan and some others were good at global sport. If Rami Sanjrani was like MVP of the NBA, everybody in Pakistan would be like: F*** You America, LeBron who? Steph Curry? We make best Curry. Bombs and prayers? I have no time for prayers, I need to watch Sanjrani win NBA finals.I think it's superb what Wales are doing in this competition. Shame England players and management were nothing like their Welsh counterparts. Even though it was disappointing seeing some of the Welsh team cheer on England's defeat, I am happy for Welsh supporters.
International and club are too different. Not saying we should Lukaku but using this tournament as a justification to not buy him makes little sense.Fair play to Wales, got their tactics right and know their strength. Now sack Wilmots and bring somebody in who will actually get this team going and knows that the feck he's doing. What. A Pathetic. Performance....I saw some shambolic defending at display today. Kompany was dearly missed for this one. Both lukaku's today were feckin terrible. Wouldn't score in a brothel, well done Romelu you imbecile. At least I'm convinced now United shouldn't go anywhere near you. Good luck to Wales for the rest of the tournament. At least this should be the final nail in the coffin for good old Mark. Adios amigo!
Nice post full of insight. Sometimes context is everything.I've got to defend Wilmots here, of course he was out of his depth, but he got the job because they couldn't find anyone else. After years of mismanagement, empty stadiums and beeing the no 77 in the world the Belgian FA was a mess and did not have the money or organization to properly care for a national team. Van Gaal had talks with them and found out that's not how he wanted to work, Advocaat took the job, found about the circumstances he had to work in and quit. So Wilmots had to get them through qualifying and he did, they kept winning so he could stay. After the disappointing WC the quite poor but exciting match against the US the whole country including the king and the government was in denial and acted like they did well because the national football team was keeping the country together, the Flemish, the Wallons and the immigrants.
The players accepted the manager because they knew the situation and had to make the best of it, and they were good enough to get some results without a top manager. But a manager like that means that the players have to solve more issues on the pitch themselves, players like DeBruyne and Hazard shouldn't just have their runs and brilliant moves and shots, they should lead the team, they should be pointing a lot and get their teammates in the right positions. That's difficult for players, but that's the responsability that comes with accepting a manager like Wilmots. They weren't up to that.
In the end, Wilmots got the Belgian FA and the national team through a very difficult time were even the continuing existence of a Belgian national team was in doubt, and he took them to 1st in the world on the Fifa list. Now of course it's time for a seasoned manager, but that's a situation that is created with the help of Wilmots. So the Belgians should acknowledge that Wilmots wasn't good enough for the job, but be thankful for the job he did and respect the fact that he doesn't resign himself, but deserves his contract beeing ended with some nice financial compensation. Wilmots beeing the out of his depth manager was the problem created, wanted and chosen for by the Belgians.
Vidic, Ferdinand and Carrick wouldn't get themselves all fooled like that. I'd wager that if Vertonghen and Vermaelen had been available that action would also look a bit differently. But anyhow, when Robson-Kanu received the ball in the box it looked like the only way to go was passing it to his right for incoming teammate. That was seemingly a move that was, kind of, set in stone for all onlookers. And then he did the unthinkable. Simply ingenious move.Nit picking, you have to question how all 3 Belgian defenders all spectacularly bought the Cruyff turn cos they thought the ball was getting moved on leftwards, great run in support from the left wing back again? (Williams?) - who also might have scored himself, earlier on.
What a load of rubbish. I never asked for someone like Wilmots and I thought it was absurd to keep him after the World Cup, when it became abundantly clear he would never improve this side. Sure it was our FA that decided to keep him around and I blame them for this mess as much as anyone. But Wilmots was and is a completely inept manager. I don't see why I should respect the awful job he did. Our NT beat teams and improved in the rankings thanks to individual talent and despite Wilmots. Whenever more than individual talent was required, we utterly failed. We haven't beaten a single half competent side in a competitive match under Wilmots. He's a pathetic excuse for a manager, absolutely worthless without any redeeming qualities. I'll celebrate his departure like we've won the World Cup.I've got to defend Wilmots here, of course he was out of his depth, but he got the job because they couldn't find anyone else. After years of mismanagement, empty stadiums and beeing the no 77 in the world the Belgian FA was a mess and did not have the money or organization to properly care for a national team. Van Gaal had talks with them and found out that's not how he wanted to work, Advocaat took the job, found about the circumstances he had to work in and quit. So Wilmots had to get them through qualifying and he did, they kept winning so he could stay. After the disappointing WC the quite poor but exciting match against the US the whole country including the king and the government was in denial and acted like they did well because the national football team was keeping the country together, the Flemish, the Wallons and the immigrants.
The players accepted the manager because they knew the situation and had to make the best of it, and they were good enough to get some results without a top manager. But a manager like that means that the players have to solve more issues on the pitch themselves, players like DeBruyne and Hazard shouldn't just have their runs and brilliant moves and shots, they should lead the team, they should be pointing a lot and get their teammates in the right positions. That's difficult for players, but that's the responsability that comes with accepting a manager like Wilmots. They weren't up to that.
In the end, Wilmots got the Belgian FA and the national team through a very difficult time were even the continuing existence of a Belgian national team was in doubt, and he took them to 1st in the world on the Fifa list. Now of course it's time for a seasoned manager, but that's a situation that is created with the help of Wilmots. So the Belgians should acknowledge that Wilmots wasn't good enough for the job, but be thankful for the job he did and respect the fact that he doesn't resign himself, but deserves his contract beeing ended with some nice financial compensation. Wilmots beeing the out of his depth manager was the problem created, wanted and chosen for by the Belgians.
Great insightful post for the most part.I've got to defend Wilmots here, of course he was out of his depth, but he got the job because they couldn't find anyone else. After years of mismanagement, empty stadiums and beeing the no 77 in the world the Belgian FA was a mess and did not have the money or organization to properly care for a national team. Van Gaal had talks with them and found out that's not how he wanted to work, Advocaat took the job, found about the circumstances he had to work in and quit. So Wilmots had to get them through qualifying and he did, they kept winning so he could stay. After the disappointing WC the quite poor but exciting match against the US the whole country including the king and the government was in denial and acted like they did well because the national football team was keeping the country together, the Flemish, the Wallons and the immigrants.
The players accepted the manager because they knew the situation and had to make the best of it, and they were good enough to get some results without a top manager. But a manager like that means that the players have to solve more issues on the pitch themselves, players like DeBruyne and Hazard shouldn't just have their runs and brilliant moves and shots, they should lead the team, they should be pointing a lot and get their teammates in the right positions. That's difficult for players, but that's the responsability that comes with accepting a manager like Wilmots. They weren't up to that.
In the end, Wilmots got the Belgian FA and the national team through a very difficult time were even the continuing existence of a Belgian national team was in doubt, and he took them to 1st in the world on the Fifa list. Now of course it's time for a seasoned manager, but that's a situation that is created with the help of Wilmots. So the Belgians should acknowledge that Wilmots wasn't good enough for the job, but be thankful for the job he did and respect the fact that he doesn't resign himself, but deserves his contract beeing ended with some nice financial compensation. Wilmots beeing the out of his depth manager was the problem created, wanted and chosen for by the Belgians.
Basically I agree. He should never have been the manager. The point is that the Belgium national team and the KBVB were in such a mess that Wilmots practically was the only one willing to take on the job. He's was second assistant of the previous manager, with hardly any experience. The situation of the Belgian national team was desperate and that wasn't his fault and he steadied the ship.What a load of rubbish. I never asked for someone like Wilmots and I thought it was absurd to keep him after the World Cup, when it became abundantly clear he would never improve this side. Sure it was our FA that decided to keep him around and I blame them for this mess as much as anyone. But Wilmots was and is a completely inept manager. I don't see why I should respect the awful job he did. Our NT beat teams and improved in the rankings thanks to individual talent and despite Wilmots. Whenever more than individual talent was required, we utterly failed. We haven't beaten a single half competent side in a competitive match under Wilmots. He's a pathetic excuse for a manager, absolutely worthless without any redeeming qualities. I'll celebrate his departure like we've won the World Cup.
I think you overstate his impact. We were getting somewhat better under Advocaat and Leekens and Wilmots was handed such an easy qualifying group for the World Cup that we would've gotten improved results with the talent available anyway, no matter the manager. He achieved the bare minimum.Basically I agree. He should never have been the manager. The point is that the Belgium national team and the KBVB were in such a mess that Wilmots practically was the only one willing to take on the job. He's was second assistant of the previous manager, with hardly any experience. The situation of the Belgian national team was desperate and that wasn't his fault and he steadied the ship.
Of course he should have been replaced after the World Cup, but the Belgians as a people were to eager to celebrate that WC as a success. Tactically he was awful all along, but he kept Belgian national football alive and he kept the team together, and normal national managers don't have to do that and that was an achievement in itself. My point was there should be some appreciation for how bad things were and how he managed to put the national team in a situation where his own tactical ineptitude started to matter. Before him, Belgium had much problems than a tactical inept manager.
Was exactly the same against us in the semi off the cup .International and club are too different. Not saying we should Lukaku but using this tournament as a justification to not buy him makes little sense.
I agree, but it's the Belgians as a nation who failed to have a well organized FA and the structure in place to just appoint an experienced capable manager. It's the Belgians as a nation that failed to acknowledge that they underachieved at the WC and the manager should be replaced. Of course a lot of Belgians did, but other interests than those of the football fan took precedence. You can't just take that out on Wilmots, if you hire someone with well known limitations, you can't hold those limitations against him. Hiring competent managers is the privilege of countries with the right structures surrounding the national team.I think you overstate his impact. We were getting somewhat better under Advocaat and Leekens and Wilmots was handed such an easy qualifying group for the World Cup that we would've gotten improved results with the talent available anyway, no matter the manager. He achieved the bare minimum.